One: The RCMP Integrated Market Enforcement Team (IMET) works inside the office space of the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC)

Two: The OSC serves two masters, public protection and fostering efficient markets for industry participants.

Three: But the OSC is only ‘paid by one master’, namely the investment industry, the very industry that they are supposed to police...is the one that pays them...100%.

Four: When a crime like illegal sub prime mortgages skims $32 Billion from Canadians (including $2 Billion from the Public Service Pension Plan of Canada, the retirement money for retired RCMP officers and Judges, etc)

Five: The RCMP may be called upon to look into the breach of public trust that is possible, when it is learned that the OSC was a factor in the $32 Billion loss since this regulator granted ‘exemptive relief” from the Ontario Securities Act. (Like tainted meat inspectors who allow the product to be sold...)

Six: RCMP will not even bother to look at the case (crime?) until forced by the PMO office, under pressure, to do so.

Seven: After being forced (the RCMP IMET is so thinly staffed, its annual budget is in the “one thousandth’s of the amount spent on “normal” policing in Canada...) into having to look at this case, the RCMP turn to whom for help? Why the OSC, of course, the very folks who granted the “exemptions” to our laws.

Eight: The OSC writes a report for the RCMP, saying that they find no criminal activity and no reason to pursue this case. (without telling the RCMP that they, the OSC as a participant, and actor, so to speak in the alleged breach of trust)

Nine: RCMP now have a 50 page report, from the OSC, giving them all the reason they need to look no further.....than the very people who allowed Canadians, (and retired RCMP employees and retired Judges) to be harvested of billions.

$50 billion is the approximate neighborhood of “every crime in the land combined”. (except the ones we try not to measure of course, namely systemic financial crimes:)While $32 Billion was the take from just Sub Prime ABCP products (see the entire topic at this forum in another topic thread). http://www.investoradvocates.ca/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=140

Imagine ONE product scam, assisted by the regulators...is able to drain Canada of 60% of the value of all the other millions of crimes in the land, combined. Thanks OSC.

The perfect crime, or the perfect cover....?

The RCMP working alongside the very people who play games with the law to harm Canadians.....it could be a good scam.....and it could also be real.

It seems that certain members of the investment industry have kindly stepped forward to make sure that the RCMP receive the right kind of "guidance" on what constitutes a financial crime or not. (Question: I wonder how that will work out?:)

This photo is rather old, but I discovered it in 2014, and it does a wonderful job of "splaining" perhaps why the RCMP does not pursue systemic fraud within the financial industry. The back-story is found on this site and also on the site listed below.http://www.investorvoice.ca

(Answer: RCMP closes file on $35 billion dollar ripoff of sub-prime mortgage "investment" paper (non bank ABCP) with the "help" of some of the very agencies who helped participate in the fraud, with the granting of exemptions to the laws to sell these toxic products. Foxes working in the henhouse disguised as police helpers:)

This "see no evil" as it relates to systemic (and specific) crimes by the investment industry runs rampant by the RCMP. Jumping to OBSI topics also found on this site, you will learn that investigation of the systemic abuses of the industry itself is something they (the industry) focus most of their money and attention on preventing. It is the source of tens billions of additional dollars each year to the industry and people like the RCMP end up being mere unwitting accomplices to a skilled industry system.

The end result is that Canadians have the best country in the world to commit financial crime, or systematic victimization of consumers, and things like the regulators and the RCMP end up being mere "facade" systems of protection.

"facade": The word can be used as a figure of speech to describe the "face" that people show other people, as opposed to what they really think or do.

Part of the strategy is to put more people in jailAmid the failure of the RCMP’s specialized corporate crime unit to notch a single major corporate criminal conviction, Canada’s largest securities regulator has forged ahead to create a serious offences unit of its own to handle complex criminal cases destined for the courts, the National Post has learned.

Sources confirmed that the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) has partnered principally with the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP), and is currently in discussions with Metro Toronto police and the RCMP, to establish a new unit that will investigate and prosecute boiler room operations, such as fraud and market manipulation and other illegal activities, many of which are associated with organized crime.

RelatedQuestions led to more questions in First Leaside caseOSC modifies plans for controversial no-contest settlementsThe OSC has hived off a group of 20 staff members, many of these former police officers and ex-Crown prosecutors, to create the serious offences unit. This group, eight of which have received special constable status from the OPP, operates on a separate floor with a computer network walled off from the rest of the regulator’s staff to preserve the proper chain of command and evidence. The members, who just completed a weeklong training session, have assorted weapons in their arsenal to pursue miscreants, including the ability to employ search warrants, wiretapping and undercover surveillance, which are allowed by the Criminal Code as part of their work in conjunction with the police.

“We recognize the serious harm that those involved in securities fraud offences perpetrate against retail investors,” Tom Atkinson, director of enforcement at the OSC told the Post in an email. “As such, we’re focused on bringing more cases before the Ontario Court of Justice where sanctions, including fines and jail sentences, are expected to have a greater deterrent effect.”

Added a source familiar with the discussions, who asked not to be named: “There’s a perception that there are cases that are not being treated criminally and are not being handled criminally and this shows they are prepared to do it.”

The OSC, which has jurisdiction over the Toronto Stock Exchange and the TSX Venture Exchange, is the dominant securities watchdog in Canada and its decisions affect most of the country’s mutual funds, pension funds and brokerages. However, the OSC, like most of the other 12 provincial and territorial securities regulators, has long faced criticisms for its poor track record of enforcement, especially on major cases, such as insider trading.

The creation of the RCMP’s Integrated Market Enforcement Teams (IMETs) a decade ago has done little to change that, especially in the wake of failed high-profile prosecutions against former executives of Nortel Networks Corp. and Royal Group Technologies Ltd. In fact, a U.S. academic described Canada as “a first-world country with second-world capital markets and third-world enforcement.”

In the unlikely event of a national securities regulator, and continued criticism about the lack of robust and timely enforcement, OSC chair and CEO Howard Wetston said recently the watchdog would “intensify its enforcement program and explore other ways to protect investors.” To that end, the OSC has been focusing on market manipulation and fraud. These types of fraudulent stock schemes may not be as high-profile, but they are among the most prevalent, causing significant damage to investors and compromising the reputation and integrity of Canada’s capital markets.

“We need to up our game in terms of deterrence. We don’t feel the administrative process is effective or appropriate in many of these cases,” said a securities official who asked not to be named.”

Traditionally, these stock fraud cases have been handled at tribunal hearings inside provincial securities regulators. However, the possible penalties are more lenient than those that can be imposed by a judge. As a result, the OSC is trying to move these cases into the courts where jail terms can be meted out.

“Part of the strategy is to put more people in jail,” said the source.

Mr. Atkinson said that there are plans to eventually create a specialized unit within the OSC to tackle insider trading, which has proven much harder to successfully prosecute. It has long been a private complaint of securities regulators across Canada that Crown attorneys and court judges do not take a severe enough view of corporate crime. The serious offences unit, in collaboration with various police forces, is an attempt to change that attitude.

“We want to leverage our expertise in the area of securities with law enforcement to ensure that criminal behaviour is dealt with in the appropriate criminal forum,” said Mr. Atkinson.

The move by the OSC comes at a time when the RCMP has created a financial crimes unit as part of a wider re-engineering of the national police force currently under way across the country. The newly constructed unit is comprised of the Commercial Crime unit, IMETs and the Proceeds of Crime unit, which mostly deals with drug-related offences. The RCMP already shares a joint intelligence unit at the OSC and those investigators will be folded into the OSC’s new serious crime unit.

OTTAWA — A former RCMP superintendent says he’s never seen the degree of political control over the Mounties that exists now, and says it “does not bode well” for an objective police investigation of the Senate expense scandal.

Gary Clement, a 30-year veteran of the force who spent more than half those years working in the national capital region, told CTV’s Question Period on Sunday that the thrust of the RCMP investigation will likely centre around Section 122 of the Criminal Code and breach of trust.

“From my read of the act and what’s been alleged through the media, I think they’ve got pretty strong grounds,” Clement said.

The Mounties are taking a preliminary look at the expenses of three senators, Mike Duffy, Patrick Brazeau and Mac Harb.

RelatedConsidering the scandals plaguing multiple levels of government, it seems accountability as a virtue is on the waneKeith Beardsley: Where were the Liberals on the Duffy report?Harper admits that ‘perhaps’ he should have responded to Nigel Wright’s resignation soonerPeter Foster: Get Stephen Harper! Duffy ‘affair’ has exposed a pandemic of Harper Derangement SyndromeAll three claimed housing expenses that were deemed inappropriate and have repaid, or are being asked to repay, tens of thousands of dollars.

In the case of Sen. Duffy, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s chief of staff Nigel Wright secretly gave him $90,000 to pay off his inappropriate expenses.

Duffy’s refund was then used by him to deny co-operation with independent forensic auditors, and the refund has since been cited by top Conservative senators as the reason why a Senate committee report deleted language that was critical of Duffy’s actions.

That has opposition MPs and Liberal Senators claiming a cover-up was orchestrated by the Prime Minister’s Office.

Clement noted in his CTV interview that Wright is a lawyer, “so I would think, or hope, that he’s … dotted his i’s and crossed his t’s,” in his deal with Duffy.

“But if this was done knowingly to cover up what could be construed as a criminal act, I think Mr. Wright would have some questions that need to be answered,” Clement added.

Whether any of those answers will see the public light of day is another matter, said the former RCMP superintendent.

The Conservative government mandated in 2011 that all RCMP communications be cleared through the office of Public Safety Minister Vic Toews.

“Having been at the RCMP for 30 years, and when I was, I was in the national capital region for the better part of 18 years dealing with all levels of investigations, yeah, I would suggest I don’t think I’ve seen — at least since my relationship with the RCMP started — I don’t think I’ve ever seen the type of control that’s been placed on the RCMP, which is a little bit disconcerting from a former member,” said Clement.

He said he knows the investigating officer involved in the Senate case has the “utmost credibility.”

“So if he’s allowed to — which I hope the commissioner (Bob Paulson) has directed — undertake an unfettered investigation, then I think the public will know,”" said Clement.

He quickly added a large caution: “Let’s be honest, the direction that Mr. Toews as a minister, everything’s got to go through him, in my mind does not bode well for objectivity.”

A spokeswoman for the Public Safety minister said there is no political interference in police matters.

“As you are likely aware, political actors are legally prohibited from involving themselves in investigative matters,” Julie Carmichael said in an email. “Our government respects this principle at all times.”

Toews’ communications director noted that for non-investigative RCMP issues, the RCMP Act states that the government appoints the commissioner “who, under the direction of the minister, has the control and management of the Force and all matters connected therewith.”

Sgt. Greg Cox, a spokesman for the RCMP, was also emphatic about the force’s investigative independence.

“The RCMP has full independence with regards to the investigations it carries out, and how it conducts them within the authorities it has under the RCMP Act and the Criminal Code, as well as other Federal statutes,” he said in an email that, under current policy, would have been approved by Toews’ office.

Short 3 minute video of question by Wildrose MLA Rob Anderson May 2013 re RCMP insider informs him of hundreds of criminal cases which they have no budget or ability to investigate: Further to Alberta becoming a Wild West

From snooping on spouses to downloading pornography, a number of RCMP members in Manitoba have been disciplined for abusing their time on duty and the resources available to them on the job.

RCMP documents obtained by CBC News reveal the disciplinary actions taken against 10 members of Manitoba's D Division between the beginning of 2010 and September 2012.

The documents outline cases of members using police databases to keep tabs on girlfriends and ex-wives, using RCMP computers to download pornography, and providing civilians with the results of licence plate searches.

The sanctions handed out range from a formal reprimand to a reprimand and the loss of 10 days' pay, although some of the decisions noted that the members could have faced dismissal from the RCMP.

Transgressions taken seriouslyWhen asked about the discipline files, Supt. Stephen Thatcher, director general of the RCMP's Adjudication Directorate Services Branch, said these kinds of transgressions are rare but the police force takes them seriously.

"It takes away from the work done by dedicated members across the country," he said.

"The bottom line is to get the members back into the confidence of the [RCMP] and the public."

Of the 11 files given to CBC News, some of the most serious instances involve breaches of civilian privacy, often for personal reasons.

Brian Bowman, a partner with Pitblado Law in Winnipeg, said while he is impressed with the RCMP's openness in releasing the documents publicly, he does find the violations concerning.

"There's a trust factor that is commensurate with with the sensitivity of the information," he said.

"For that reason alone, I would expect they're being taken very seriously."

Bowman added that it is increasingly common to hear of cases of "employee snooping," adding that it's a problem in both the public and private sectors.

Keeping tabs on spouseIn February 2011, the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol informed Canadian authorities that an RCMP officer's wife had been romantically involved with, and still maintained connections to, a member of the Hells Angels outlaw motorcycle gang.

The subsequent investigation revealed that the RCMP officer had used the National Crime Data Bank, without authorization, 69 times over an eight-month period to look up information on his then girlfriend — now wife — as well as the gang member and himself to see if authorities had made a connection between himself and the gang member.

When questioned, the officer admitted to accessing the system without authorization and telling his wife to change her licence plate number because it was associated with the gang member.

The disciplinary board members said the officer's acceptance of "responsibility for his actions and [participation] in the early resolution process" were considered alongside the allegations.

He was handed a reprimand and docked eight days' wages.

Laptop used to watch soccer, download pornBetween January and May 2010, a civilian member of the RCMP used his work-issued laptop computer to play World Cup soccer matches while on duty and download "pornographic files, programs, videos, music and other images," according to the documents.

The discipline documents also indicate the member had had his internet privileges revoked in March 2010 following a previous transgression.

The board noted in its decision that using an RCMP-issued laptop to download pornography, "after having been previously warned against such activity, is disgraceful."

It added that "civilian members [of the RCMP] must hold themselves to a much higher standard of conduct than what is expected from a member of the general public."

The board issued a reprimand and docked the member two days' pay.

RCMP resources used to snoop on ex-wifeIn another case of private information being misused, one RCMP officer left his patrol area to snoop on his ex-wife.

According to the discipline documents, the officer's ex-wife and her boyfriend saw an RCMP patrol car driving through the parking garage of her Winnipeg condominium building at around 11:30 p.m. on May 8, 2010.

Suspecting the car was being driven by the ex-husband, the incident was reported to the RCMP's D Division headquarters in Winnipeg, which revealed the ex-husband had queried the boyfriend's licence plates in the police force's database.

The officer admitted that he performed the database search in the hopes of identifying his ex-wife's new boyfriend.

The discipline board considered the officer's acceptance of "responsibility for his actions and [participation] in the early resolution process" when deciding what actions to take. They also noted that the officer had co-operated with the investigation.

In their decision, members of the board said they hope the officer had "learned from his mistake and trusts he is indeed prepared to abide by a Code of Conduct," noting that "members of the Force are expected to act in an exemplary manner, and their conduct must be beyond reproach."

The officer was issued a reprimand and docked three days' pay.

Vigilante brother-in-lawIn December 2008, a man and a woman walked into a Winnipeg car dealership and asked to take a pickup truck for a test drive. Hours later, the truck had not been returned.

That evening, the car salesman reported the vehicle stolen to the Winnipeg Police Service and also contacted his brother-in-law, an RCMP officer, seeking assistance.

Following several requests from his brother-in-law, the RCMP officer called the Winnipeg Operations Communications Centre and requested information on the suspects based on their licence plate number.

The officer provided the information he received to his brother-in-law, who passed it on to Winnipeg police.

Winnipeg police then launched an investigation into how the brother-in-law had obtained the information on the suspects, which led them to the RCMP officer.

The disciplinary board noted that this was a unique case, in that the misconduct was motivated by a desire to solve a crime, but noted the officer had "disclosed confidential information regarding the registered owner of a licence plate."

A seasoned looking special prosecutor in Canada, part of an economic crimes prosecution unit, (supposedly 800 "special prosecutors in Canada.....anybody see any prosecutions??).......sorry, I digress..........this seasoned and specialized prosecutor said to me once, that "for every wrong there is a remedy".

I could only look on like a deer in the headlights and wonder in what world she might be referring.

Anyway, kind enough to give me a card, and suggest an interest in learning more about what it was that I was concerned about in the area of systemic investment victimization etc., one of my topics of interest.

I gave her links to only two videos on youtube, which I felt gave a relatively brief impression of some big (multi billions) wrongs committed on Canadians with regularity, and have heard nothing since.

For every wrong there is a remedy. Just not with any person, agency, authority or body in Canada who might be charged, paid, or responsible for finding said remedy...........opps! Did I say that last part out loud?

Below another example (of hundreds) showing how those in positions of power and authority appear to be wilfully blind or "terribly busy", or whatever.......... when rich powerful people in positions of financial trust, abuse everyday citizens out of their rightful investment returns.============================================================From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Mailout [mailto:Ministerial.CorrespondenceUnit-Mailout@justice.gc.ca] Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 8:14 AMTo: (name removed)@shaw.caSubject: Correspondence on behalf of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Dear Mr. Brown:

On behalf of the Honourable Rob Nicholson, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, I acknowledge receipt of your correspondence concerning allegations of investment fraud. I regret the delay in responding.

I understand why you have written to the Minister and asked for assistance. However, as Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Minister Nicholson is mandated to provide legal advice only to the federal government. I hope you will understand that, for this reason, he is not able to provide legal advice to members of the public or to investigate the matters you describe.

As you are aware, allegations of criminal conduct should be reported to the local police in the jurisdiction where the incidents occurred. I note that you have already contacted your local police in this regard.

The oversight of provincial policing services is the responsibility of the provincial governments. Accordingly, you may wish to share your concerns with the Honourable Jonathan Denis, Minister of Justice and Solicitor General of Alberta, who is the appropriate authority in your province. Information on how to contact Minister Denis is available at http://justice.alberta.ca/contact/Pages/default.aspx.

Matters related to the RCMP, which is an agency of Public Safety Canada, fall under the purview of the Honourable Vic Toews, while the Honourable Christian Paradis, Minister of Industry, is responsible for the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act. Accordingly, I have taken the liberty of forwarding a copy of your correspondence to Ministers Toews and Paradis for their information and consideration.

The most useful suggestion that I can offer, given your situation, is to seek the advice of a lawyer in private practice to determine the course of action that will best serve your needs. If this is not financially possible, you may wish to consult with the legal aid office closest to you to determine whether you qualify for help.

The Law Society of Alberta’s Lawyer Referral Service can refer you to a lawyer who offers the first half-hour interview free of charge. You may contact this service by calling 403-228-1722 in Calgary, or 1-800-661-1095 in the rest of Alberta.

(all victims are expected to take their problems to "elected" persons, (police generally do not act on securities matters, they deflect away to "others") who may have a stronger vested interest in seeing that no such problems are brought to the attention of the public, than in seeing that the public is protected.............advocate experience and opinion, hope you never have to find out your own (opinion) through real life experience)

The RCMP’s Integrated Market Enforcement Team was formed in 2003. As of Nov. 23, it had achieved the following results:

Investigations leading to criminal charges: 19

Individuals charged: 52

Individuals convicted: 11

Investigations before the courts: 9

Individuals before the courts: 29

Source: RCMP

The RCMP is hoping that a new strategy of going after crooked securities lawyers, investment advisers and stock brokers as if they were drug dealers and mobsters will turn around the fortunes of its white-collar crime units.

Formed almost a decade ago, the force’s Integrated Market Enforcement Teams have struggled to produce results. As of last week, they had secured criminal convictions against 11 people, according to data provided by the force. Twenty-nine others have cases pending before the courts.

RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson told Postmedia News last week he’s sent a message to IMET teams in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto and Montreal to use more traditional policing methods – undercover operations, wiretaps, agents and informants – to go after fraudsters and market manipulators.

“Somehow in our strategy development, we’ve taken the view that in order to catch the criminals, we need to get more like them – we need to have more market knowledge, more experience in the markets – and to a certain extent that’s true. But really the key for us is to use our tried-and-true strategies for catching those people,” he said.

“That’s how we get results in the near-term and avoid lengthy and protracted court cases.”

In a followup statement, the force said that information-sharing between police and provincial securities commissions and other partners is improving. IMET teams, which receive $40 million in federal funding each year, are also developing cases based on their own intelligence-gathering and relying less on referrals from securities regulators, the force said.

A 2011 RCMP criminal intelligence brief on capital market fraud reported that even though so-called white-collar “criminalized professionals” can wreak havoc on financial markets and investors’ lives – and even though some of them have links to organized crime – they continue to fly largely†“under the radar” and outside the scope of police intelligence reports.

Three or more persons co-operating to commit a criminal offence are considered an organize crime group“According to the Criminal Code, three or more persons co-operating to commit a criminal offence are considered an organize crime group, yet members of the law enforcement community and the general public do not afford the same level of importance to criminalized professionals as they do to more commonly known organized crime groups,” the briefing document said.

The report provided a breakdown by region of the most common types of fraud cases. Market manipulation, particularly in resource-based share prices, is the big concern in B.C. Ponzi schemes were prominent in Alberta, with some schemes linked to outlaw motorcycle gangs.

Ponzi schemes and “boiler room” operations, in which scam artists use high-pressure sales tactics to dupe people into phoney investment opportunities, were common in Ontario. In Quebec, market manipulation and embezzlement – often involving the Italian mafia – were highlighted.

Investigating these types of cases can be complex and time-consuming. A 2010 Public Safety Canada report found that IMET’s investigations typically stretch for about two years before charges are laid.

Getting charges to stick hasn’t been easy.

The IMET team was dealt a major blow in December 2010 when an Ontario judge acquitted six executives of a large plastics company, Royal Group Technologies, in a fraud case that had stretched for several years and included a high-profile raid on the Toronto headquarters of the Bank of Nova Scotia.

The RCMP and Crown prosecutors are hoping for a different outcome in January when an Ontario†judge is expected to issue a decision in another high-profile fraud case involving three former Nortel executives, including ex-CEO Frank Dunn. They†are accused of manipulating the former telecom giant’s balance sheet.

In B.C., a sentencing decision is expected in January for John Gregory Paterson, founder of Vancouver-based mining exploration company Southwestern Resources Corp. An IMET investigation revealed that he had inflated gold assay results from a drilling project in China to boost share prices.

Meanwhile, in Alberta, IMET investigators†announced 16 additional charges this month†against three Lethbridge residents who are accused of operating an investment scheme that defrauded investors of over $1 million.

“We’re not at the point where I can wheel out stats and claim victory, but I have observed a different mindset in the investigative team,” Paulson said. “Certainly they’re being held to a different level of account.

Former RCMP officer Chris Mathers said he wasn't surprised by the police's decision and questioned whether public money should be spent to investigate an alleged fraud that he said the Bank of Montreal should have avoided. (CBC)RCMP and the Calgary police have told the Bank of Montreal they won't investigate what could be the biggest mortgage fraud in Canadian history, CBC News has learned.

Both police forces stated last week they were reviewing the voluminous case — more than 35,000 documents — assembled by the bank's investigators to see if a criminal investigation was warranted.

But sources have told the CBC that top investigators from both forces recently met with the bank and told it they were not interested in pursuing a criminal investigation.

The lack of police response does not surprise former RCMP officer Chris Mathers, who said police forces simply can't tackle alleged frauds of this magnitude.

"There just aren't enough police officers to investigate these crimes," said Mathers, a Toronto-based corporate crime consultant. Mathers said fraud is rampant in Canada and police forces are already swamped.

"If you double the number of investigators, you will just have double the number of crimes being investigated and still have a whole bunch stacked in a pile and waiting to go."

BMO launches lawsuitAs the CBC first reported on Tuesday, the Bank of Montreal has launched a massive lawsuit accusing more than 300 Albertans — including mortgage brokers, realtors and 17 lawyers — of being involved in a sophisticated scheme that generated $70 million worth of phony mortgages in one year.

The bank's investigators claim the scheme's organizers wired money from the alleged fraud to several countries, including Lebanon, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Dubai. Among those named in the suit is Calgary Conservative MP and lawyer Dervinder Shory.

The bank alleges he was negligent in his handling of five land title transfers. Shory has denied any wrongdoing and said he would vigourously defend himself in court. None of the allegations contained in the lawsuit have been proven.

The fraud allegations have sparked demands for a police investigation, including those from hundreds of people who have posted comments on CBC's website.

"So where is the police in all this? Will there be criminal investigations and possibly criminal charges," one reader asked. Another wrote: "The RCMP and CSIS should be investigating this."

But Mathers questioned whether public money should be spent to investigate an alleged fraud that he said the bank should have avoided by properly vetting mortgage applications. He blamed the banks for creating a climate in which mortgage fraud thrives.

"The banks are fighting tooth and nail with each other to get this kind of mortgage business," he said. "They are cutting corners and so because they cut corners, they become victims of fraud."

Toronto lawyer Sidney Troister, who has specialized in mortgage-fraud cases for the past 12 years, said they pose daunting legal challenges. It is difficult for prosecutors to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a fraud is intentional.

"That is no mean feat when you probably don't have any witnesses. You are faced with solicitor-client privileges and obstacles in terms of getting information out of the lawyers," Troister said Sunday. "You are looking at reams and reams of paper that would be the basis upon which you would prove your case. It is no easy task."

JPMorgan bought the shares of Bear Stearns Cos. which means JPMorgan owns and is accountable for all of Bear Stearns Cos. “material misrepresentations” and “improper practices”.

In Canada, CI Fund Management Inc. bought the shares of Assante Corporation on November 14, 2003, and

on January 11, 2010, RCMP IMET Supt. Eric Mattson wrote:

The matter of [ Assante ] secret commissions has been discussed at length withinthis office, the Toronto office and through legal counsel and prosecutors for IMET. This is a matter of law and the legal opinion rendered by all the lawyers is that theoffence is not made out. Although the opinion states the practice as noted byAssante and other mutual fund companies was not fair, it was a practice knownand authorized by regulatory agencies and commissions and once identified asbeing unfair steps were taken, and complied with, by Assante and other firms.

(In the USA some percentage of financial crime eventually gets prosecuted, while here in Canada, the police and RCMP defer action to "self regulators" and help them continue by "apologizing" for their acts of cheating the public)

I greatly appreciate your reply to my questions pertaining to the establishment of the Seniors Advocate. I would like to clarify with you that I have no complaints per se pertaining specifically to the services provided by our lawyer re the ~$10,000 in billings from the law firm to take an action before Small Claims Court, which is scheduled for trial in November. My Dad and I have a good relationship with the lawyer in question, and we understand that this cost is part of the current unfocused, fend-for-yourself model that seniors are having to contend with when they have experienced deception in the business practices of investment dealers that are apparently allowed to lie to their clients - with impunity. I believe that my Dad's encounter with the inadequacy of public policies that put seniors in a position of having to spend unconscionable amounts of their savings, and have no certainty that their experience will be treated seriously, constitutes a grave flaw in our governance as a society. I am therefore attaching a report on the articles in the Criminal Code of Canada that I summarized in the year 2010 that clearly puts the Criminal Code on the side of categorically holding that any deception in the sale of securities is a violation of the criminal law in Canada. The actions of our regulators, and law enforcement bodies have demonstrated that the prevailing policy is to ignore the law, and to accept the current spin that holds that investment dealers are "self regulating". This fantasy needs to be examined and rejected at all levels of the industry and within all our communities. The priority must be to insure that honest representations of investment products must be demanded of anyone selling an investment instrument. Otherwise, investor confidence is undermined, and our community loses investment funds to places that treat this matter with more seriousness.

My Dad has been traumatically hurt by the fact that investment companies that he has dealt with (not all companies he has invested with have treated him in bad faith, but two have), are seemingly given no censure for mis-stating the level of risk he has been put into, when he has requested the lowest level risk. The regulatory system seems to also feel that his complaint - when a broker - we later discovered, (who had been put on a close supervision watch for unreported dealing) - went into my Dad's account and made a $160,000 transaction buying mutual funds - AFTER my Dad had explicitly told this broker over the phone that he wanted no part of this transaction. The Investment Dealers Association (now Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada - IIROC) took the position when my Dad lodged a complaint about his being abused by this brokerage, that it was just my Dad's word against the broker. I have been watching this kind of disingenuous regulatory service being heaped on investors such as my Dad, as I have investigated his experiences over the past five years.

One pattern of depersonalizing the elderly that I have observed in my Dad's history since he began to experience dishonest brokerage activities in 2006, is that the people and agencies that are purported to exist to uphold lawful treatment of investment clients, and clients of seniors organizations - seem to feel that they have a right to contact the organization that my Dad is making a complaint about, - WITHOUT first getting the evidence that my Dad is basing his complaint on - and these agents seem to feel that acceptable investigative procedures are being followed, by talking vaguely to the company that has mistreated my Dad, and to accept their denial of a problem - on the basis of brush-off verbal responses from these companies. There is a widespread lack of comprehension that this kind of activity only serves to undermine the interests of the complainant, and what needs to be required is that anyone contacting the complained about agency - must first get the whole disclosure of the factual record before they make any contact with the defendant company. The current policy amounts to completely unprofessional and destructive practices. I am wanting to explore this matter further with you so that this kind of disregard of the interests of frail elderly targets of abuse is no longer allowed. The Ombudsman on Banking Services and Investment, OBSI, also will not co-operate in letting the complainant know what the replies are to questions that the complainant needs answers to by the defendant broker. If the OBSI could require answers from investment sellers, and to document these answers to the complainant, this would provide a much needed essential service, that would facilitate accountability in the industry. At present, refusing to answer questions, or giving a deflective buck-passing response is tolerated as a business practice. With your help, this will not be allowed in BC.

I have noticed the above trivializing kind of behaviour in the RCMP - to the point where constables that have had experience with deceptive practices by investment dealers, and who have offered to help resolve a particular problem, have been made "unavailable" after they have offered to help. This has happened on at least two occasions. One of these constables had told my Dad that she had previously worked for Nesbitt-Burns and had found the company too corrupt to work with. She said that she would be happy to work with my Dad to resolve his problem. Since then, in 2009, my Dad has tried to contact her on at least a dozen occasions, and has never been able to get a returned phone call. I was present in a meeting with a Staff Sergeant Jordan, who advised getting my Dad's complaint file out of the hands of IIROC and put into the hands of a third party who could make it available to law enforcement. This Staff Sergeant had suggested that it would be his advice to trace who at Canaccord Capital had given the order to put false notations on the commission slips about the trades being "unsolicited" when in reality the advisor had always solicited trades to my parents. Staff Sergeant Jordan had agreed that this mislabeling of commission slips constituted creating false records. After we had achieved what he told us to do, when we got the BC Securities Commission to accept the holding of this file, the Staff Sergeant told us that he was "not able to go any further" on this matter.

When I began to look at the legal rules on sale of securities by visiting the Court House Law Library in Kelowna, I learned that there are two principles in law that underlay the purposes of penalties for deceptive acts in the sale of securities. These two principles are:

1) The create general deterrence of future abuses.

2) To prevent unjust or undue enrichment from the proceeds of fraudulent business practices.

A very clear problem exists in getting protection for elderly seniors who are very vulnerable to being taken advantage of - when less than honest dealers get the clients' signatures. I am hoping that your Ministry and the Seniors Advocate office will be able to look at the complete history of cases that constitute systemic abuse of seniors, and will help and co-operate with the creation of remedies that will allow the elderly who can prove that they have been harmed by deception, that these atrocities be stopped without any further sacrifice from the abused senior.

There is a great deal more to this subject, but I will not attempt to put too much history into this message. I do appreciate the opportunity to communicate with you and to put more facts to you on the problem of the systemic damage that is being done to the savings of retirees through misrepresentation by some investment dealers in this province.

The second attachment is a statement that was received from Finance MInister Flaherty on his proposal at the recent Finance Ministers meeting of the G20 in Paris. This statement holds that corporations must always put their clients' interests first. I am hopeful that with action by the Seniors Advocate, the requirement of investment companies to put their clients' interests first will become the rule in this province. I am looking forward to your comment on this matter, and I am hopeful that you will be co-operative in realizing this objective for seniors in BC.

serious advice, for very serious folks. Please forgive me if the advice is unsolicited or unwelcome. Take what works for you and toss away the rest. I feel it is a game changer for the right group with the right case.

I keep seeing billions of dollars of crimes, for which the RCMP is about as capable and well funded as my seven year old nephew.........

Therefore..........IF we wish justice to happen in Canada on large scale financial crime, we must seek civil remedy........so far so good.

However, each citizen of Canada also has every right to file their OWN private criminal charges against a crook. So far, criminal charges are NOT BEING DONE by anyone, RCMP, Calgary Police, anyone. Not here. Not in the USA. BIG media opportunity therein. Big justice seeking opportunity also.

One of these days, a very angry group is going to have a well enough written and researched statement of claim against a crook (or crooks) and this statement of claim, may also include, fraud, negligence, gross negligence, breach of trust, gross misrepresentation., etc., etc.

They will have to prove some of these things for their civil trial.............and some of these things (every one, in fact) are also in the criminal code of Canada.

Soooooo to get to the punch line. One of these days, I look forward to seeing a group of angry citizens, step forward and file these criminal charges, which may or may not result in warrants being put out for the arrest of those responsible. Not saying it will happen in your case. Not even saying it will happen right away. But I DO KNOW for certain, that it will happen when enough credible citizens step forward with enough evidence to sway a judge to issue the summons or the arrest warrants.............this will be a partial PR exercise, partial "court of public opinion", partial media frenzy story., etc., etc., etc.

(I think your Public relations guy could have a field day with the story "RCMP FAILS TO INVESTIGATE, SO CITIZENS FORCE THE ARREST OF WHITE COLLAR CROOKS" It would flash around the world.

then picture the nightly news stories of your criminal running and hiding from cameras all over the province........then picture the media shitstorm as your case gets international attention for the "balls" shownThen picture the game changer for your lawsuit, as the world sees your crook chased or arrested and as the court of public opinion has it's way..............or do not take this step, and picture ten years of back and forth, dead end litigation, while your crook drains his corporations and hides his money offshore...........

I see it as a serious discussion item for you, your legal team, and your PR guy.